Nagendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9981 of 2025

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Nagendra Kumar Son of Shri Rup Narayan Paswan, Resident of VillageJamhaita, Jamheta, Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Gaya. Retired while working as Headmaster from Govt. Middle School Gopalkera, AnchalFatehpur, District- Gaya.

¶4

Narendra Singh Son of Ramdas Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Siddharthpuri Colony, Road No. 01, Manpur, Police Station- Muffasil, District- Gaya. Retired while working as Headmaster from Govt. Middle School Singathiya, Anchal- Wazirganj, District- Gaya.

¶5

Dhananjay Prasad Son of Madho Prasad, Resident of Village- Narouni, Naili, Khizersarai, Police Station- Sarbahda, District- Gaya. Retired while working as Headmaster from Govt. Middle School Neyamatpur, AnchalNeemchak Bathani, District- Gaya.

¶6

Chandeswari Prasad Ghosh Son of Late Prabhu Prasad, Resident of Village and Post Office- Meskaur, Police Station- Meskaur, District- Nawada. Retired while working as Headmaster from Govt. Middle School Naudiha Sultanpur, Anchal- Fatehpur, District- Gaya.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Additional Chief Secretary-cum-the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Additional Chief Secretary-cum-the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya.

¶13

The District Education Officer, Gaya.

¶14

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gaya.

¶15

The District Accounts Officer, Gaya. 9. The District Treasury Officer, Gaya. 10. The Accountant General, Birchand Patel Path, Bihar, Patna.

¶16

The Accounts Officer, Birchand Patel Path, Bihar, Patna.

¶17

... ... Respondent/s

¶18

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Birju Prasad, GP-13 Mrs. Shweta Anand, AC to GP-13 For the AG, Bihar : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.9981 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 2/6

ORAL ORDER

3 18-11-2025

Heard the parties.

The petitioners have approached this Court for the

¶24

following reliefs :-

¶25

“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus for commanding and directing authorities the respondent concerned to provide the benefits in the light of letter no. 571 dated 13.06.2023 issued under the signature of the Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, in compliance of the order passed by this Hon'ble High Court on 09.08.2019 in CWJC No. 16165 of 2019 (Kishor Kumar and Others vs. the State of Bihar and Others) as also in the light of memo no. 383 dated 03.04.2025 issued by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gaya in compliance of the order dated 14.11.2024 passed by this Hon'ble High Court in CWJC No. 7006/2024 (Jitendra Kumar and Others vs. the State of Bihar and Others) by which, direction has been given for providing the notional benefits of trained pay scale from the date of relieving after completion of training and monetary benefits since 01.10.2003 and since the petitioners had been sent for one year in-service teachers training course for the session 2000-2001 and after completion of training, they were relieved to join their respective schools on different dates in the year 2001 and in the light of the aforesaid letters, the

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.9981 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 3/6

¶27

petitioners are entitled for grant of notional benefits from the date of relieving from teachers training as well as differences of arrears of salary for the said period till further retirement as also for revision in pensionary benefits as all the petitioners have retired while discharging their duties as Headmaster from different Govt. Middle Schools in the district of Gaya.

¶28

II. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus for commanding and directing the respondent authorities concerned to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the aforesaid letter no. 571 dated 13.06.2023 issued under the signature of the Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna as also the memo no. 383 dated 03.04.2025 issued by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gaya, which have been issued in compliance of the judicial orders passed by this Hon'ble High Court, and provide the notional benefits from the date of completion of training, as there is laches on the part of the respondent/State for not sending the petitioners for in-service teachers training course and taking examination belatedly in which all the petitioners successfully passed.

¶29

III. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus as an alternative prayer of the petitioners for directing the respondent authorities concerned to dispose of the representations of the petitioners dated 29.04.2025 addressed to the District Education

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.9981 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 4/6

¶31

Officer, Gaya and the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gaya by reasoned and speaking order by ventilating the genuine grievance of the petitioners for providing the notional benefits from the date of relieving after successful completion of teachers training.

¶32

IV. For issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which the writ petitioners will be found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶33

Mr. Mishra, learned Advocate for the petitioners adverting to the facts submitted that the issue raised before this Court has come up for consideration before a Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 16165/2019 and the Court having taken note of the facts that the petitioners were sent for the training in academic session in the year 2014-15 and the course was completed in May, 2017, hence, no reason was found to deny the benefit of trained pay scale to the petitioners with effect from May, 2017 when the course was completed as the petitioners of the said writ petition have completed their training but for the reason best known to the respondents the examination could not be held in time and the result was published belatedly along with the junior batch. The Court further observed that the respondents cannot take advantage of his own wrong in defeating the genuine claim. Similar matters

¶34

Patna High Court CWJC No.9981 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 5/6

¶35

have further come up for consideration in C.W.J.C. No. 7938/2020 wherein the identical relief has been accorded to the petitioners in light of the afore-noted decisions. The State being aggrieved also preferred Letters Patent Appeal, bearing L.P.A. bearing no. 456/2021, which also came to be dismissed vide order dated 03.04.2025. It is further submitted that in some of the matters where the claim of the identically situated persons have been rejected by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, the aggrieved persons also approached before this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1774 of 2025 against the impugned order whereby the claim of identically situated persons were rejected, the same has also been set aside vide order dated 10.11.2025.

¶36

In light of the afore-noted settled legal position, the persons who have approached before this Court they have been allowed the benefit of trained scale with effect from the date of completion of their training, however discrimination has been caused, despite the Bihar litigation policy, 2011, duly formulated by the State. The petitioners have also approached before the authorities concerned by filing representations and are pending consideration but till date no positive decision have been taken, compelling the petitioners to approach this Court.

¶37

Learned Advocate for the State is present.

¶38

Patna High Court CWJC No.9981 of 2025(3) dt.18-11-2025 6/6

¶39

There is no confrontation with regard to the legal position as stated in the writ petition. Thus, in view of the aforesaid submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and the materials available on record, this Court deems it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the concerned District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gaya, to look into the grievance of the petitioner, as raised in their representations; the copy of which are marked as Annexure-P/8 series and dispose of the same keeping in mind the specific prescriptions provided under the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011, especially Clause 4(c)(i), thereof, preferably, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Suffice it to observe that the respondent authority shall also ensure the admissible and consequential benefits as have been accorded to the other identically situated persons on being found their claim justified.

¶40

Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶41

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶42

rohit/-

¶43

U

Nagendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Kumar Roy Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Anand Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar

Dharmesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shambhu Nath Vs The State of Bihar

Arvind Kumar Roy Vs The State of Bihar